8 ms·
"almost made the internet slower"... uh, pretty sure it's been making things slower since inception when it replaced html + a few ajax requests. I know, I know,
by maliker 2y ago
"almost made the internet slower"... uh, pretty sure it's been making things slower since inception when it replaced html + a few ajax requests. I know, I know, I'm old. Get off my lawn.
- WolfOliver 2y agoHN should have a like button for comments
- wizzwizz4 2y agoIt does: the favourite feature.
- spartanatreyu 2y agoIn case anyone reading the above is confused... You have to click the timestamp on the comment first, then you're sent to a new page that only shows that one comment and a favorite button. Sometimes the favorite button doesn't appear so you have to click the timestamp again.
- thanatos519 2y agoTuring-complete content is an abomination.
- vundercind 2y agoI remember when AJAX made things faster. Then we stopped sending html to insert into the DOM, and started sending JSON with a bunch of extra steps in between. The fastest sites I see these days usually just reload the whole page pretty often.
- tracker1 2y agoHTMX for the win!
- INGSOCIALITE 2y agohtmx is an answer to a question no one asked
- gumby 2y agoThe IPv6 of markup?
- ehPReth 2y agoi do like not having NAT :)
- busterarm 2y agoNor do I like IP space being an overallocated and hoarded asset.
- ungamedplayer 2y agoI feel like grandparent poster probably doesn't know the upsides of IPv6.
- gumby 2y agoI do actually remember following its development, hate NAT, and of course feel constrained by the V4 32-bit address space. But V6 has its designs problems too and while over the years I’ve tried to use it, it has never been worth the hassle and, yes, is slower (probably because most connections are to V4-only sites).
- ungamedplayer 2y agoOk.
- gumby 2y ago
- marcosdumay 2y agoReloading the entire page is very fast nowadays. Most of the need AJAX was created to solve disappeared.
- afavour 2y agoI remember when React first came out… it was actually a dream for performance initially. The VDOM diffing made complex, fast moving UIs way easier to run performantly. I lost track of it around maybe version 0.6, by the time I picked it up again we were in Redux land and the framework was five layers of crap deep. Sigh.
- Waterluvian 2y agoI’d love to see these narratives actually demonstrated in tests via blog posts. I suspect it’s more a demonstration of human memory and perception than it is of reality.
- plorkyeran 2y agoWell, you can go back and look at the original blog posts announcing React? I assume they're still on the internet somewhere. React was a pretty massive speedup over the portions of Facebook and Instagram's frontends that it replaced and they showed off their benchmarks a lot early on. That library had very little in common with the thing now known as React, though.
- brazzy 2y agoFrontend development is the most quickly revolving cycle of enshittification I know of.
- theturtletalks 2y agoEnshittification is when a company offers an amazing product, but once they have a hold over the market, they make it worse and squeeze customers. It works because customers are so locked in and there are market forces stopping them from switching to a competitor. Frontend development is not being enshittified. We have so many frameworks that you can switch to if React isn't your cup of tea. Hell, you can use Astro and use React, Vue, Svlete, etc and it renders to HTML. HTMX is a new framework and easy to pivot too since React devs know JSX. React is also silently borrowing ideas from Svelte and Solid.js (and those were inspired from React) so all these frameworks are improving each other without even knowing it.
- the__alchemist 2y agoWhen I first learned react and web programming, I was very confused about this! React was advertised as fast! From reading react docs, articles, tutorials etc. There was a concept called "fiber" that was around the corner that would make websites even faster; it had demos where pixels would dance around the screen. I didn't grasp what made it faster, but assumed it was doing some binary magic in the web browser! I learned more, and ended up writing my own react-like framework in Rust/WASM. (Seed). Now, I program in HTML, CSS, and JS. If the project triggers a certain complexity threshold, I'll bring in TS. React advertising itself as fast was a lie.
- meiraleal 2y agoIt was fast! Now it's legacy tech.
- ramesh31 2y ago>Now it's legacy tech. Yep. The tide is turning fast toward Vue these days. React died with the departure of Abramov. It's been over 2 years since the last major release, and 19 just screams nonsense "makework" incremental stuff.
- phist_mcgee 2y agoI think you need to get out of your bubble, Vue in its current state is significantly less popular than react. https://www.similartech.com/compare/react-js-vs-vuejs https://www.similartech.com/compare/react-js-vs-vuejs
- hot_gril 2y agoI've heard of Vue but legitimately thought it was an IDE or something.
- kelnos 2y agoThat doesn't refute what the GP is saying. "Tide is turning" is about a rate of change; that site only presents a snapshot of the current state of things. Not saying you're wrong, as I have no evidence either way, but a more useful measure to see what's happening would be a plot of the numbers of React and Vue sites over time.
- DangitBobby 2y agoUnfortunately what the headline means is "even slower than that", though you probably knew that already.
- davidmurdoch 2y agoI really like your lawn. I feel at home. Can I stay a while?
- hot_gril 2y agoLast time I wanted to make a simple static webpage, I thought just HTML/CSS would be enough. My friend wanted some background images that don't become stretched or cropped no matter what the window shape is. If there's some way to do this with CSS, I couldn't figure it out, while it was straightforward in React. Just took the window dimensions and calculated div sizing based on that. Even better, when we decided we actually wanted to use more vertical images when loading in a vertical window (perhaps a smartphone or a split window), that was easy in React. I feel like HTML had a lot of assumptions around desktop PC usage.
- doomroot 2y agoHhmmm not sure how react helps here. I would love to see your code if you could share a gist?
- hot_gril 2y agoI'll make one when I get home. IIRC: You'd scroll down vertically on the site, through divs with different backgrounds. The initial HTML/CSS approach was nothing special, just adjacent divs with background-image with background-size options, and I tried other tricks to no avail. The React approach was useWindowSize(), set div width to 100% or the screen width in px, set div height to (image aspect ratio) times width, set `background-size: 100% 100%` or the exact div width/height px.
- hot_gril 2y agoEither ChatGPT has gotten better or I gave it a better prompt this time. It suggested this padding-bottom hack that sorta works but requires hardcoding aspect ratios, which I didn't want, but at least it demonstrates the layout we wanted with a Windows XP Bliss background image example: <style> .image-container { position: relative; width: 100%; height: 0; padding-bottom: 80.44%; /* h/w aspect ratio */ background-image: url('https://d7hftxdivxxvm.cloudfront.net/?quality=80&resize_to=width&src=https%3A%2F%2Fartsy-media-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com%2F2RNK1P0BYVrSCZEy_Sd1Ew%252F3417757448_4a6bdf36ce_o.jpg&width=910'); background-size: cover; background-position: center; } </style> <div class="image-container">hi</div> <div class="image-container">hi2</div> <div class="image-container">hi3</div> Though it seems laggier than the React version when I resize, and this doesn't get into making the text resize to fit the divs...
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- masfoobar 2y agoYep.